Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 36. (Read 1058927 times)

My Windows wallet 0.8.5.1 (beta one from devcoin.org) keeps getting stuck at the same block when I try synching (around the time 0.8.6.0) came out for Linux and what not. Just wanted to mention that. I've got it all backed up and I actually think maybe since deveCuy mentioned to mine "1 block only" that this is something I'd have expected so no worries. (just don't forgot your windows friends when you got the time =) ). Thanks!

By using the "treasuries" system to calculate the value of each coin based upon the "treasury" of the Civilisation, Nation, Corp, Clan etc etc whose currency it "is" (in the game), you can almost kind of look at all the coins so far thus treated as in a way just various different "denominations" of "the same darn thing".

So even if you (probably quite rightly) are dubious about the overall "real value" of any of it, if nothing else it ought to seem somewhat reasonable to consider the resulting relative values of those coins, all computed relative to each other from the "treasuries" each holds of the others, as having at least some leanings toward validity.

An unfortunate (for some folks anyway) side-effect of thinking of them this way is that you could thus choose to look at any one of them that has managed to get itself listed on "an exchange" as a yardstick from which to calculate the value of all the others as compared to whatever the one that is on an exchange is paired against on the exchange.

So for example if DeVCoin were on an exchange you could look at the Latest Rates include-file, which shows the value of various things in terms of DeVCoins (how much each thing is worth in DeVCoins), and, by reference to the price of a DeVCoin on some exchange or other, you could compute the value of all the other things in the file whose value is computed for that file from a "treasury".

It might not escape your notice that the file does list a few things that are NOT computed from a "treasury" thus are not really currently a direct full part of "that same darn thing" above-mentioned.

For example BiTCoin and LiTeCoin both lack such a "treasury".

So feel free to ignore the purported values shown in that file for such items.

Heck, it seems like lately BitCoins and LiTeCoins are worth a heck of a lot more DeVCoins than the file typically shows, IF you consult "exchanges".

The thing is, there are very few assets listed there that are on any "exchanges", or, indeed, have ever been on any "exchanges".

So the few that do get onto an exchange from time to time are for many people the only chances they get to cash any of those assets out to fiat.

And a lot of people are still really fond of fiat.

So it can probably be expected that on "spot markets" whichever of the denominations get onto an exchange are likely to fetch premium prices in terms of the other denominations.

While at the same time, also fetch un-premium  --  anti-premium --  prices on the exchanges as folks fall all over each other in a "race to the bottom" trying to convert out to fiat.

Then too, the whole crypto field has been in a horrible "bear market" for a couple of years now almost, such that even the most famous and well-regarded coins have been fetching insanely low prices in fiat. Heck, who thought we'd ever see bitcoin below ten grand American for gosh sakes?!

So anyway, maybe it could be useful from some folks' point of view to kind of average some kind of a conversion rate for "that whole darn thing" by figuring out the average difference between what the Latest Rates thinks a thing that does have a "treasury" its value is computed by is worth and what that same thing fetches on "exchanges".

Since the "treasuries based" value is a kind of attempt at a "fundamental" value, one could think of such a ratio/difference as being the difference between fundamental value and "discovered price".

If that is a valid way of looking at it though, the implication seems to be that currently the "discovered" prices seem typically to be bargains.

I have been thinking for a long time that according to market theory, so called "arbitragers" are supposed to be out there somewhere running around taking advantage of any areas in which markets are not all in agreement about what something is worth, snapping up anything that is a bargain in some places as compared to how much they can get for it in another place.

But I think maybe in this case it is not only that arbitragers are not paying close enough attention and acting swiftly but also that how you see it all, as a potential arbitrager, might depend quite a bit upon what your "home currency" happens to be.

Then too, also maybe that arbitrage over time is a bit different than instant-gratification arbitrage.

Personally I have tended, as a market-maker, which is maybe not really the same thing at all as an arbitrager, to not worry about the supposed value in terms of some third, fourth (etc) currency of either of the two involved in a pair I am market-making with, so maybe I just have not been seeing things the same way many or most other traders do.

For example in marketmaking DVC/BTC, I0C/BTC, IXC/BTC etc I do not worry about the value of either side of the pair in dollars or yen or francs or litecoins or even big macs or icecream cones, I just focus on increasing my holdings of both sides of the pair, building up both the buy side and the sell side, and in fact bearing in mind that of course which side is which depends mostly on which side you have some of and which side you are trying to get some of.

Whereas I suspect that some traders are not thinking of whether they are getting the non-bitcoin side for less satoshis than before, or getting more satoshis for them, but rather a more complicated calculation, worrying whether they are getting more dollars for them or getting them for less dollars. Or yen. Or francs. Or icecream cones or whatever.

And maybe that is actually a more sensible approach? Afterall, if both sides of a pair I am working with are going down in number of icecream cones they can buy, does it matter whether I am steadily accumulating more of both sides of my pair?

Hmm. Food for thought. But more of them presumably would buy more icecream than less of them would, so maybe "its all good"?

-MarkM-

What if you're on Windows? Sorry for the n00b question. Would it work on windows subsystem like when I set up a node?

QUICK UPDATE

We are very close to have round 99 fixed. If some miner is interested on collaborate, please try the new prerelease version of Devcoin 0.8.6.0 from the official repository: https://github.com/devcoin/core

I recommend you to follow Qtera's instructions:

https://steemit.com/busy/@cpol/how-to-compile-your-very-own-devcoin-wallet-in-ubuntu-18-04

AND use the following command to download the source code:

$ git clone --branch 0.8.6.0 https://github.com/devcoin/core

FINALLY, don't use it with your current wallet, please create a new separate wallet for your trial.

WARNING: Please mine ONE and only ONE block, then shutdown your node and report your findings here.

Go go Devcoin!

- develCuy

I read what you said on Oct 20 over in the I0C post and from what I understood you sort of made it seem like exchanges just ignore the value of these coins anyway.  What I do know is you all have spent almost a decade on this board typing explanations and keeping the world updated on the progress of the project(s) without any guarantee someone from the outer world might even take the time to read a "bitcointalk.org" post.  I know after I started looking into this all 2 years ago, it still took time for me to get here where you all have been leaving valuable information all over this place.  Time is more valuable than paper currency with a federal government saying its "valid currency" - at the same time I'm sure the basket weaving done on all of your in-game currencies/assets whatever has been done with a set schedule, very carefully, and not outwardly obvious in a way that anyone will say "yeah you're right, it's going to be a great bet if you know what lies ahead from a developer's standpoint"... I don't even need that to realize that the devs here have been more than willing to discuss all of these things publicly and that takes time, repetition, and patience when dealing with an audience that may not even exist. I haven't posted here because there's no reason for me to.  I also don't mind people calling me whatever names they want over my beliefs.  But you seem pretty smart, markm, nova, traxo, develcuy, etc. - even Vlad - who can insult me all he wants, he still is using his time to do it.  So since you've all spent about a decade or so here in the public eye and who has any idea how long behind closed doors at DevCorp -- I trust you value your time as much as I appreciate it. This project will work out. Doesn't seem gimmicky, doesn't seem poorly planned, quite the opposite of anything that would throw a red flag. If time is what is necessary, I wouldn't expect anyone in my position to go sell their coins on a "3rd party exchange"... Not that those aren't a nice place to go buy coins, but I just don't see the point in it. There's got to be something bigger to this all. You said volume isn't necessarily a good thing on the I0C, markm, and I thought about that for quite awhile before I understood.  What this is going to take is time, and only some of you know how much. I'm willing to wait. These coins are from a secure blockchain, secure as any. I'm not going to be looking for USD, who says one can't use their [insert ancient coin here] as easy as ApplePay in the future... I'm gonna go out on a limb and say since all of you spend countless hours putting this all out here for anyone to stumble upon from a bitcoin related google search, this means something to you. I can wait.

I think I read something recently from someone trying to get a coin listed on CoinMarketCap, apparently the coin has to be on two exchanges both of which are themselves already listed on CoinMarketCap.

-MarkM-

Will our current wallets work the same after this event?

Yes unfortunately coinmarketcap needs to be updated by coin developers to let them know of any new exchanges coins are listed on from what I gather but all these coins have been listed for a long time on freiexchange  and still coins have not updated coinmarketcap so the devcoin etc developers must contact them for this to happen.

Freiexchange is ran by freicoin community and supported by fed fab (one of the blockstream founders along with Mr Timon)and VERY credible people so people should support this exchange which is hosting ancient coins for their legacy criteria although I do not see namecoin there yet for some reason.

Hmmm yeah the blockchain is already in synch.

What needs to be re-synchronised is the receiver-files collection.

Everyone needs to install the same set of them that have all been updated to contain valid repositories of them, so even nodes starting from scratch from the very first receiver-file get the correct list of repositories all through the set so each time they go for the next one they still find it.

(As too many of the old URLs are now dead.)

We did this at least once before.

-MarkM-

Are you forking the coin next?

That sounds like you are forking the coin.

Oh cool I did not know I0Coin was still on any exchanges, I could not find it on CoinMarketCap to find out.

IXCoin has buy offers every satoshi of price all the way up on Yobit, though I admit there is probably good reason to be suspicious of Yobit since for literally years now I have been periodically reminding them in support tickets that the transaction they claimed to have sent my 140,000 or so AXIOM coins in does not exist on the AXIOM blockchain nor on the forked AXIOM blockchain that I split off as AXON when the fork was so bad it did not seem to be resolvable. They do not even respond to the support tickets. So I can understand why few people seem willing to risk trying them.

I do not know about Freiexchange, is that one that was created for Freicoin way back when or some new possibly fly-by-night exchange?

I am very reluctant to start committing resources to yet another new unknown exchange when so many have run off with our money already.

It kind of makes sense that you cannot sell DeVCoin for a whole satoshi given that it had been down to about a third of a satoshi on the previous exchange it had been on, where one of its pairs was LiTeCoin.

Mind you that too was a new out of the blue fly by night "exchange" that basically ran off with all our money so it is not really surprising that no one had been willing to build a strong buy-side there.

The only reason I am bothering to work on the buy sides of FED, GPL2 etc (the sci-fi themed coins) on LiveCoin.net, which for all I know is yet another exchange just biding its time waiting for the best moment to claim to have been hacked or to simply fly by night, is I have to be on there anyway right now to sell DMD thus have been doing DMD market-making on there, so I have been sidetracking little bits of bitcoin here and there from my DMD work to start building up Sci-Fi themed coins. Maybe we can get LiveCoin to create a DMD/DVC pair or something?

However, a whole lot of these coins can be traded on HORIZON against HZ (for which reason it would be handy to get HZ back onto Poloniex or something) and they all can be traded directly against each other on STELLAR.

The more of them we can get listed on decent exchanges the better though, since if only very few of them are listed, as has been the case for years now, whichever of them IS listed tends to end up being the dumping route for all of them, so all the dumping anyone wants to do of any of them all ends up routed through whichever one of them they can find a route out to fiat through. In much the same way that having so many coins trade against bitcoin makes bitcoin bear the brunt of all the dumping anyone wants to do of an of the many many coins that are paired against bitcoin.

I am really sick of exchanges running off with all the bitcoins every time I build up a strong buy-side for a coin against bitcoin, so I am trying to focus my market-making efforts on the HORIZON and STELLAR platforms where I can feel more confident that my HZ and XLM coins, as well as all my other coins, are more secure than on some random new out of the blue previously unheard-of exchange.

Since the buy side of IXCoin on Yobit still goes all the way up to 222 satoshis, and I have a buy offer of 100 coins each satoshi all the way up, you should be able to sell almost 22200 IXCoins there. Actually I tihnk more, as likely my offers are for more than 100 coins toward the bottom of the price-range. I say almost though be cause some of the 100 buy offer I have at 222 satoshis has already been taken. As more of my sell offers are taken I will continue strengthening the buy-side, and if they re-instate I0Coin I will send some I0Coin back there again (was it there before?) likewise if they list DeVCoin, being as how I am already on that exchange.

Starting afresh on some new exchange that someone possibly created just to steal coins and/or identities/passwords seems less and less of a good idea with each one that rips us off.

You should try to bear in mind that money is basically an I.O.U, if you sell some you should be prepared to buy it back; don't dump it like some kind of fly by night ripoff artist, be a responsible coin-shop willing to buy back the coins you sell, making your money from "a small re-stocking fee on returned coins" or the gap between the sell price and buy price.

-MarkM-

Excuse me sir but IXCOIN,i0coin and Devcoin are all on freiexchange and there is zero liquidity on any of them.You cannot even sell DVC for 1 satoshi because there is no buy wall and a stack of DVC on sell side at 1 sat.IXCOIN has NO buyers and I0coin has no buyers.I could place 10k IXC and i0c for sale right now and nobody will buy and I cannot even get 1 sat for DVC so my point is why would anyone bother with these coins because in the end NOBODY is "here for the tech" and only money talks.

UPDATE

We should have good and bad news soon, but the most important is that Devcoin is overcoming just another obstacle in a long journey with ups and downs.

File custodians are currently working to get the blockchain back to normal operation. We also need the miners to resync the blockchain when asked for, so please stay tuned!

Now I want to take a brief time to publicly share my wonder for the internal design of Devcoin. The current situation with file custodians encouraged me to deeply study the source code for understanding what is happening. I value so much all the learning and wish to have more people willing to learn from the hidden gems of Devcoin's source code that can only come from masterminds like Unthinkingbit's. Also, I want to thank Mark for taking time to share his rich knowledge of Devcoin and other cryptocurrencies, I would find it impossible to understand anything without his guidance. The quoted text below is perfect example of what I'm saying.

Last but not least, I should also mention Emfox, which is a very accountable person that is always willing to collaborate, which is critical for keep Devcoin blockchain operational.

Now I think that everybody collaborating in the team deserves acknowledgement, and I'll make sure to make specific mentions whenever possible.

OK, back to cleaning up our mess...

Go go Devcoin!

- develCuy

Please get your facts straight before you try to defame me, yet again, with your paranoid BS. Anyway it weren't me.

- Nova

This coin is the "unit of account" for a massive amount of "accounts receivable" and is also a "reserve currency".

There is also a whole "DeVCoin-based economy" in the Galactic Milieu in which quite a lot of DeVCoin is tied up.

The longer you-lot keep trying to make DeVCoin appear "worthless" the easier it is for debtors to pay off the over 2900 BILLION DeVCoins they owe.

If you-lot had upheld the value of the coin enough it might not have been necessary for the creditors to have to become so willing to accept payments against those accounts-receivable in coins other than DeVCoins themselves, thus the debtors would have had to actually BUY DeVCoins with which to make their payments. But that become totally impractical years ago when Devtome authors started just dumping their coins instead of inveting them into various facets of the DeVCoin-based economy. So you've maybe only yourselves to blame for the fact all that economic activity gets to just look up the supposed value of a DeVCoin and pay "an equivalent value" in some other currency of their choosing.

Then again maybe what was really going on was the authors on Devtome were the very same people who owed billions upon billions upon billions of DeVCoin? So had a big incentive to make sure the value of DeVCoin stayed as low as they could make it so that they could pay off those debts all the faster?

There are many currencies you can convert DeVCoin into, and even now there are still some of them that are still somehow managing to continue having a spot on various web-based "crypto exchanges".

It does keep getting harder, yes, because every time we manage to build up a good solid buy-side for one of our coins on one of the "exchanges" the "exchange" claims to have been hacked and runs off with all the coins, or it de-lists the coin due to the fact we tend to trade mostly over-the-counter or on HORIZON or STELLAR networks so maybe do not provide as much "volume" to the exchanges as they would like.

Partly this is also probably due to so many folks still not recognising how much the coins tie together, so as more and more of the coins that are still on "exchanges" fall off of them they do not see that as affecting some one particular coin they happen to favour, being as how they themselves maybe had not been in the habit of trading "their" coin for various of the others that are on exchanges.

The fact is the number of "our" coins that are still on exchanges has been shrinking for years, and some of them (CoiLedCoin, GRouPcoin, GeistGeld, TeneBriX and FairBrix come to mind) never even got onto any exchanges and no one seemed to care, maybe because they could always just trade them for DeVCoin, I0Coin or IXCoin all of which were still on exchanges.

But wake up folks, I am not sure I0Coin is on any exchanges anymore, I do not think IXCoin is on many, I am trying to start building buy-sides for GPL2, KED, SCIFI and QBT on LiveCoin but would not be surprised if as soon as I build them up strongly they will claim to have been hacked and run away with all the money. That is why I keep trying to just stick to HORIZON and STELLAR, at least there I know the coins are actually present and accounted for.

-MarkM-

What is point of all this when you have no trading activity on the exchange and nobody willing to trade it against bitcoin or dollars?What is coin any use for??

I have finally figured out what is happening and I'm working on a fix. We had a mixture of situations:

1. Two custodians have their servers not working properly, they tend to go offline for different issues with their infrastructure
2. Ctya's server was shutdown in the middle of round 98, rather than at the end, not allowing Traxo to take over smoothly
3. Another custodian has enforced HTTPS connections but most of the miners nodes don't support it
4. The custodians not were in sync early enough for round 99

For the reasons above, we had 4 of the 7 mirrors "out of sync" for the standard of Devcoin blockchain, that leaves only 3 working mirrors when we need at least 4, the nodes are then rejecting the receiver files. The consequence of is that miners apply a penalty know as "fallback reduction", as an incentive for solving the issue with file custodians.

Hopefully, we can finally fix this situation, but it requires consensus from all the file custodians and perhaps adding a couple mirrors as I anticipated since previous rounds. My proposal is to implement one or two automated receiver files mirrors, so that we can lower the chance for this situation to happen again. Also, we have to be more strict with file custodians, if they are unreliable, we can't hold them for a single round more, and that is what I'm going to do from now on. Along releasing the receiver file earlier, we should define a safe deadline soon.

People interested on the technical details of what originated this situation please check the issue queue: https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

Last but not least, the latest version of Devcoin supports HTTPS, but it looks like the majority of miners never managed to update their nodes. I don't blame them because we never released any official stable version for a long time. So we should do it now!

Let's clean up all the mess!

- develCuy

My nodes stopped complaining long ago now.

Are you sure miners behave differently?

It seems reasonable that once a round begins it is "too late", to keep trying to get the files after that just makes more and more of a re-organisation (fork undo) be needed if suddenly such files did appear.

Having such files available now seems likely to confuse any new nodes that try to catch up with the blockchain.

-MarkM-

After studying the source code a bit more, I'm more convinced that we neither have a bug or a network attack, instead we have the miner nodes doing what they are programmed to do as Mark already said. Why are they generating only 2500 DVC per block? Because miner nodes are unable to validate that the 50% + 1 of file custodians have their mirror of receiver_99.csv in sync. For that reason they aren't downloading that file, rather they apply a programmed "fallback reduction" that lowers the rewards to 2500 DVC.

There is an assumption that we had to have the file custodians in sync 2 weeks in advance to the new round, but I can't confirm it yet. So far I read in the source code that miner nodes keep trying to download the next receiver file before, during and after discovering a new block and regular nodes do it when syncing the blockchain with the network.

Long history short, we currently have a contradiction, because the file custodians doesn't seem to be hosting the exactly same copy (bit by bit) of receiver_99.csv. At least, that is what the nodes "can say". But when I compare the files, they are exactly the same. Another option is that somehow the nodes aren't able to download all copies of the receiver file, they might be getting a truncated file or even empty. This idea is reinforced by the fact we had 3 file custodians outdated or with their server offline, the remaining 4 should be enough but it doesn't seem to be the case.

I keep debugging the source code for finding a solution. All help is welcome! We have an open issue here https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

- develCuy